Posts from ‘December, 2009’

However, the 800-mile project, — spearheaded by Royal Dutch Shell, ConocoPhillips and Exxon Mobil — jumped a major hurdle late Wednesday.

This just in from Shell online…

Change to Daily Dilbert cartoon

Please note:

As of January 1, 2010, Daily Dilbert is no longer available on the Shell Online homepage itself. Instead, those wishing to access the cartoon can do so by visiting the external site www.dilbert.com.

Although polls have shown that Dilbert has been one of the most popular elements of the Shell Online homepage, repeated user feedback has also revealed that some users have difficulties understanding the language in the cartoon or are uncomfortable with the topics covered and sense of humour.

By removing the cartoon strip from Shell Online, but providing a link to the Dilbert homepage instead, we hope to better reflect the sentiments of users across our global audience while still offering those who enjoy the cartoon a way to keep doing so.

The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the federal Communications Decency Act gives the site immunity from liability for libel based on posts by users. The ruling upholds a decision issued last year by U.S. District Court Judge Gerald Bruce Lee in Alexandria, Va.

Financial Times

By Hugh Williamson

Published: December 30 2009 22:06

It is dusk in London and Amnesty International has mobilised hundreds of protesters in its campaign against Shell’s allegedly damaging business practices in the Niger Delta. They march in a snake formation, some carrying flaming torches, others a replica pipeline on their shoulders. Their aim is to draw attention to huge oil spills and gas flaring that, they say, are ruining the health and livelihood of many in this troubled corner of Nigeria.

The Amnesty argument is two-fold. First, that Shell could do much more to prevent damaging practices such as large-scale oil spills and gas flaring – which involves burning off gas generated as a byproduct of oil production and can harm people’s livelihood and health. Second, that the company is hypocritical in allowing these practices to happen while simultaneously claiming to have a fully effective programme protecting the rights of those exposed to Shell’s operations in the Delta.

FULL FT ARTICLE (SUBSCRIPTION)

Shell gas flaring in the Niger Delta. The practice has proved controversial. Photograph: Pius Otomi Ekpei/AFP/Getty Images

Shell must face Friends of the Earth Nigeria claim in Netherlands

Shell disappointed at Hague court ruling on Oruma oil spill compensation case

Terry Macalister
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 30 December 2009 22.00 GMT

A judge in the Netherlands has opened the door to a potential avalanche of legal cases against Shell over environmental degradation said to be caused by its oil operations in the Niger Delta.

The oil group expressed “disappointment” tonight that a court in The Hague had agreed to allow Friends of the Earth Netherlands and four local Nigerian farmers to bring a compensation case in its backyard for the first time.

Environmental campaigners insisted the case in the Netherlands was only being brought as a final resort and they declined to put a figure on the kind of damages stemming from the test case involving four farmers and alleged pollution at Oruma in Bayelsa state. But they said a variety of independent organisations in the past had estimated that the wider oil industry may be responsible for up to $20bn (£12.5bn) worth of damage as a result of pipeline spills and flaring of gas.

Geert Ritsema, a spokesman for the Dutch environmentalist group, said: “For years, these people have been trying to get Shell to clean up its mess and stop polluting their habitat. However, again and again they have come away empty-handed.

“That is why they are now trying to get justice in the Netherlands. The court decision is an initial victory for all Nigerians that have been fighting for years for a cleaner habitat and justice,” he added.

Friends of the Earth claims the oil spills are not accidents but represent a pattern of systematic pollution and contempt for the rights of the local population that had been going on for decades, something denied by the oil group.

Up until now compensation claims have been brought in Nigeria, but many have become bogged down in a congested court system.

Alai Efanga, one of the plaintiffs in the Oruma case, said: “Our village was pleased with the [initial] decision of the Dutch court. We hope that Shell will now quickly clean up the oil pollution so that we can resume growing food and fishing.”

The three other plaintiffs are all farmers and fishermen from the villages of Oruma, Goi and Ikot Ada Udo, all located in the oil-rich Niger Delta, which is one of Shell’s most important oil-producing areas. The substantive hearing of the first lawsuit is expected to be held in the spring of 2010 but Shell said it continued to believe that the case should not be heard in the Netherlands.

A Shell spokesman said: “It is with disappointment that we learned of the district court ruling. We believe there are good arguments on the basis of which the district court could have concluded that it lacks jurisdiction in respect of SPDC [Shell Petroleum Development Corporation] in these purely Nigerian matters.”

Friends of the Earth Netherlands said an important hurdle had been overcome paving the way for an appropriate court hearing. But oil industry sources said that Shell was being unfairly targeted, given that the oil spill had been caused in the first place by sabotage.

Last June, the oil group agreed to pay $15.5m in settlement of a legal action in which it was accused of having collaborated in the execution of the writer Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight other leaders of the Ogoni tribe of southern Nigeria.

The settlement, reached on the eve of the trial in a federal court in New York, was one of the largest payouts agreed by a multinational corporation charged with human rights violations.

Shell has also been under heavy fire from environmentalists over allegations of unnecessary flaring of gas from oil wells, something that is regarded as a prime source of global warming.

GUARDIAN ARTICLE

Russia, holder of the world’s biggest gas reserves, in February inaugurated an LNG plant on Sakhalin Island, entering Asia Pacific markets after relying on pipelines to Europe for decades. The $22 billion Sakhalin-2 project began year-round oil exports in December last year after previously being limited to seasonal shipments because of ice. Sakhalin-2 partners, who include Royal Dutch Shell Plc, had planned to send 55 LNG tankers from the plant this year. Gazprom owns 50 percent plus one share of Sakhalin Energy, while Shell owns 27.5 percent, Mitsui & Co. 12.5 percent and Mitsubishi Corp. 10 percent.

AMSTERDAM, Dec 30 (Reuters) – Royal Dutch Shell (RDSa.L) and its Nigerian unit will face compensation demands in a Dutch court for alleged damage caused by oil spills in Nigeria after the court ruled on Wednesday it was competent to handle the cases.

AMSTERDAM -(Dow Jones)- A Dutch court Wednesday said it has jurisdiction to rule on alleged oil spills by Royal Dutch Shell PLC’s (RDSB) subsidiary in Nigeria, a ruling which could set a legal precedent for multinationals in the Netherlands.

Documents released by Royal Dutch Shell Plc under the Data Protection Act to John Donovan, a prominent critic of the world’s largest oil company, show that Shell does not deny that his intervention in the Sakhalin2 project in Russia cost Shell billions – according to the Sunday Times – $22 billion.

Shell internal correspondence from December 2006 to March 2007 reveal that Shell was concerned that:

“…the Sunday Times has picked up the Sakhalin/drilling leaked e-mail story from Donovan’s website, They are responding with agree Os and As that have been used previously with the Guardian, but are first trying to kill the story by pointing out that is old news – slim chance that this will work.”

The story said that insider information supplied by John Donovan to the Russian government official Oleg Mitvol, known as the “Kremlin attack dog”, had cost Shell $22 billion, according to calculations made by the newspaper based on information from Shell annual accounts.

The article also featured an interview with Mitvol in which he indicated his surprise at the lack of a fight put up by Shell before it surrendered its majority stakeholding in the project. The interview with him was mentioned in a Shell internal email dated Saturday 3 February 2007. Later that same day, just hours before planned publication on Sunday 4 February, the article, which was so embarrassing to Shell senior management, was killed.

A Shell internal email dated 22 March 2007 headed “Subject: RE: News Management Grid”, reported our speculation that Shell had managed to suppress the article. There was no confirmation, nor any denial.

A Shell internal email dated 20 July 2009 discussed a Sunday Times article that was published on 19 July 2009, two years after the aborted article. The new article, which had been scrutinized by Shell, contained the following reference to the same subject:

In 2005, when the Kremlin was building a case against Shell over the Sakhalin gas project, the Donovans provided confidential documents regarding alleged environmental infractions directly to Oleg Mitvol, the minister who led the case. Shell was ultimately forced to sell a stake to the Russians, leading to billions in lost revenue. Mitvol publicly acknowledged the help provided by the Donovans in building his case.

The Shell email took issue with a reference in the article to the outcome of the most recent High Court action John Donovan brought against Shell. The person who authored the email was apparently misled by the Shell press statement issued at the time, which was a classic example of Shell Media spin (outright deception).There was however, no challenge to the veracity of the statement about Shell Sakhalin losses.

An extract from a recent Guardian article covering the same issue:

Four years ago Shell was embroiled in a bitter dispute with Russia’s environmental regulator over drilling for gas at Sakhalin Island. It was eventually forced to relinquish its majority stake in the project, costing Shell billions in lost revenue. Later, the regulator, Oleg Mitvol, publicly acknowledged the Donovans’ help in getting information about alleged claims of environmental abuses by Shell.

It is notable that in none of the Shell internal communications has Shell ever taken issue with the claim that the involvement of John Donovan and his website royaldutchshellplc.com in Sakhalin2, did indeed cost Shell billions. It also resulted in the resignation of the Project Director and Deputy Chairman of Sakhalin Energy Investment Company, David Greer. But that is another story (scandal).

Related extracts…

Prospect Magazine: Rise of the gripe site: 25 February 2007

…it is the home of www.royaldutchshellplc.com, a website which can claim to have cost Shell billions of dollars—and helped Vladimir Putin score another victory over western energy interests.

one world trust Accountability in Action Newsletter July 2007:

Royaldutchshellplc.com – The power of a website:

The site has not only cost Shell billions of dollars in Russia, but Prospect Magazine reports that the Ogoni tribe of Nigeria also use the website to spread information about Shell’s activities in the Niger Delta, and that even Shell insiders unhappy with the company use it.

QUOTE FROM ROYAL DUTCH SHELL CEO PETER VOSER IN A COMMENT TO SHELL EMPLOYEES: “I was very positively surprised by how you kept your eyes on the operational performance — on the day-to-day job you had to do — while going through the uncertainties of the last few months…”

Introduction by John Donovan: Printed below is a syndicated Bloomberg article published by the Houston Chronicle containing the above quote. It must rank as Grade A BS on a par with Shell Ethics and Compliance Chief, Richard Wiseman, making an anti-corruption speech, when in fact he has a track record of supporting and encouraging corruption, deceit and predatory IP theft by Shell managers.

We are encouraged to speak out even more frankly now that we have written confirmation from Shell that the company decided long ago that it will never sue us, apparently because we have too much Shell “internal laundry.”

Instead, discredited pathetic Shell executive directors are reduced to launching a covert global spying operation directed against Shell employees specifically in connection with this website. And they could not manage to even keep that secret. More humiliation.

Houston Chronicle: Bloomberg News

Shell chief calls 2010 ‘challenging’ for refining, costs

Dec. 29, 2009, 5:59AM

Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Europe’s largest oil company, expects the pressure on refining margins and costs to persist next year amid a challenging economic situation.

“I expect that 2010 will be, from a macro environment point of view, still a challenging year,” Peter Voser, chief executive officer at the Hague-based Shell, said in a video to employees. “We’ll see pressure on refining margins and some further pressure on competitive performance regarding costs.”

Shell and competitors such as Exxon Mobil Corp. are cutting costs as they seek to rebuild profits battered by a global recession and reduced energy demand. Shell, whose refining earnings fell 47 percent in the third quarter, is responding by cutting 5,000 jobs, or about 5 percent of its workforce, and reducing operating costs by about $1 billion in the first nine months of the year.

Voser, who took over from Jeroen van der Veer in July, wants to streamline operations after saying the company was “too complex.” As the first non-British or Dutch national to head Shell in its 102-year history, he started off by announcing a reorganization called Transition 2009, almost two years after a similar shake-up at BP.

“I was very positively surprised by how you kept your eyes on the operational performance — on the day-to-day job you had to do — while going through the uncertainties of the last few months,” Voser said to employees. “We’re closing Transition 2009 in 2009. What we’re doing now is actually embedding what we want to achieve with the restructuring into the plans and your activities in 2010.”

The refining margin is the amount companies make by turning crude oil into products like gasoline.

www.bloomberg.com

COMMENT POSTED ON ARTICLE BY JOHN DONOVAN

Royal Dutch Shell CEO Peter Voser is quoted in the Bloomberg article as saying to Shell employees: “I was very positively surprised by how you kept your eyes on the operational performance — on the day-to-day job you had to do — while going through the uncertainties of the last few months,”

This unfortunately confirms that he is just another B/S merchant. I operate a website which a Shell official has acknowledged “is an excellent source of group news and comment and I recommend it far above what our own group internal comms puts out.”

According to our network of Shell internal sources, for which we are renowned, the Voser restructuring has been a disastrous distraction with thousands of employees forced to reapply for a limited number of jobs. Voser has described this totally ruthless policy as “an interesting exercise”.  As per “Terminators” comment, thousands of jobs are also being outsourced to China and India.

In the meantime, Shell is doing business with the fanatical Iranian regime which supplies munitions that kill and maim American soldiers. Also with the Libyan dictator responsible for the bombing of Pan Am 103.

I therefore entirely endorse the call for Americans to boycott this evil company which is prepared to deal with the devil if needed, to get its hands on hydrocarbon reserves.

Remember, this is the same multinational which settled a US lawsuit in June 2009 for $15.5 million in respect of the torture and murder of its opponents in Nigeria. They rightfully objected to the decades long plunder and pollution of their Country by the Anglo Dutch oil giant.

Posted by John Donovan: http://royaldutchshellplc.com/